|
|
|
Islamic bias, Jagged 85 rfc |
|
|
Peter Damian |
|
I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined:
Member No.: 4,212
|
One of the more responsible of the editors there has conceded the scale of the problem. QUOTE Indeed, the damage he has done is immense, and it extends far beyond the history of science. Democracy, Human rights, Women's rights, you name it, there isn't a single article or section involving the history of an idea that he hasn't contaminated with his POV. I am very grateful to you for publicizing the situation on your blog, and you hit on all the main points. The good news is that the RfC was successful: He has gone on an indefinite wiki-break as a result, and knows full well that should he return and resume his past behavior, he will be banned in short order. So the damage is done, but it has at least been contained, and now the cleanup begins. There are a number of editors who are working on cleaning up after him, each one within his own specialty. I am delighted to hear you specialize in logic and the history of logic, as these articles definitely need some cleanup, and they are far from my specialty so I cannot do it myself. The extent of the damage is such that it is too much for one person to undo, but if a number of editors do their part within their specialty, then we can roll back a lot of it. So feel free to edit those articles, and do not worry about Jagged, his days of wreaking havoc on this encyclopedia are over, one way or another. Athenean (talk) 18:08, 8 June 2010 (UTC) http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...52624#Jagged_85Are those days over? Someone just reverted one of the more egregious edits of this user http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=367153592, and was promptly indef'd. By Fram of course. This post has been edited by Peter Damian:
|
|
|
|
Peter Damian |
|
I have as much free time as a Wikipedia admin!
Group: Regulars
Posts: 4,400
Joined:
Member No.: 4,212
|
QUOTE(thekohser @ Thu 10th June 2010, 2:36pm) QUOTE(Peter Damian @ Thu 10th June 2010, 3:01am) Someone just reverted one of the more egregious edits of this user http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=...oldid=367153592, and was promptly indef'd. By Fram of course. Good old lovable Fram. He'll do anything to keep a banned user's content out of the encyclopedia, especially if it means preserving stupidity in the encyclopedia. Looks like they've opened a sockpuppeting case, where some poor user (a rather good contributor in the area of analytic philosophy) is under the spotlight. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Soc...ns/Peter_DamianQUOTE Well, there's not much that can be done here. Revert, if you must. Blocking the dynamic IPs is pointless. The point he makes is, I believe, acted upon. Amalthea 21:27, 9 June 2010 (UTC)
No it's not been acted upon. There are thousands of edits by Jagged 85 still on Wikipedia. Jagged 85 is not banned. I am banned, and another entirely innocent user will be blocked also. This is Wikipedia at its best. [edit] Also, having now had experience of the checkuser system close up, it is true how arbitrary it is. A lot of these are genuine socks, naturally, but quite a few have nothing to do with me. They must be wondering what happened. This post has been edited by Peter Damian:
|
|
|
|
Milton Roe |
|
Known alias of J. Random Troll
Group: Regulars
Posts: 10,209
Joined:
Member No.: 5,156
|
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Chemical...isusing_of_refsQUOTE(Chemical Element TALK page) Jagged 85 (talk · contribs) is one of the main contributors to Wikipedia (over 67,000 edits; he's ranked 198 in the number of edits), and practically all of his edits have to do with Islamic science, technology and philosophy. This editor has persistently misused sources here over several years. This editor's contributions are always well provided with citations, but examination of these sources often reveals either a blatant misrepresentation of those sources or a selective interpretation, going beyond any reasonable interpretation of the authors' intent. Please see: Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Jagged 85. The damage is so extensive that it is undermining Wikipedia's credibility as a source. I searched the page history, and found 7 edits by Jagged 85 (for example, see this edits). Tobby72 (talk) 21:26, 14 June 2010 (UTC) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/blink.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/ohmy.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/confused.gif) (IMG: smilys0b23ax56/default/wink.gif) Shocking. Simply shocking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
| |